Zeiss lenses from july 2011

[tompoes]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am looking for some zeiss lenses but reading that Zeiss adjust the lenses as from july 2011 for film camera's. This is causing unacceptable focus errors.

I have seen that recommendations to buy zeiss zm lenses have been withdrawn.

Does have anybody problems with recently acquired zeiss lenses ???

Can you order these lenses calibrated for digital camera ???

I am confused.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Keith (M)]

I am looking for some zeiss lenses but reading that Zeiss adjust the lenses as from july 2011 for film camera's. This is causing unacceptable focus errors.

I have seen that recommendations to buy zeiss zm lenses have been withdrawn.

Does have anybody problems with recently acquired zeiss lenses ???

Can you order these lenses calibrated for digital camera ???

I am confused.

 

Where did you read that? Do you have a reference?

[jaapv]

This is a strange thing. Lenses cannot be calibrated differently for a film camera and film. What has happened when the M8 appeared is that it transpired that the digital sensor requires smaller tolerances than film for a number of reasons. The adjustment has to be more precise, but is exactly the same. A lens adjusted to M8/9 standard (as is the official Leica formula) is perfectly adjusted for film use as well.

So unless Zeiss has decided to relinquish their precision of manufacturing, this story can be shelved as a ridiculous rumor.

[tompoes]

Jaap,

Hope that you are right.

I did read this at the site of Diglloyd, a subscription site

 

Kees

[Nick_S]

There is more discussion of the differences between film and digital M bodies that are being reported, in this thread:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/190809-m9-zeiss-zm-lens-focus-error.html

 

e.g., see Mark P's quote from the Popflash.com information on the calibration differences for the Zeiss 50mm f1.5 Sonnar lens.

 

Nick

[jaapv]

Digiloyd is not the most reliable source and Zeiss will not thank him for starting this particular red herring.

 

Copied from the Zeiss website seconds ago:

 

Mit dem hochwertigen Aufstecksucher 15 mm ist das Distagon T* 2,8/15 ZM die ideale Ergänzung zur Zeiss Ikon SW Kamera.

An einer digitalen Messsucherkamera mit Crop-Faktor 1,3 wird es zum 20 mm Superweitwinkel ebenfalls mit beeindruckender Perspektive.

 

Anyway, one is at the interface of two manufacturers here, so if such a lens should misfocus, which given the lower price and different manufacturing method may occur, just send it to a third-party workshop to adjust.

 

Digiloyd is really talking through his hat here, or given the development of technical parameters, Zeiss has asked him to start a bit of viral marketing.

As Leica discovered with the M8, their lens adjusting procedures needed extensive upgrading in the digital age. There was quite a bit of both expertise building and serious money for new equipment involved.

Leica is well on track nowadays.

It would not be surprising if Zeiss were not prepared to follow Leica in this respect, after all, they are not in the business of building the more finicky DRFs.

But as they do market their lenses for the M8/9, they are bound to get the same complaints that Leica got in 2007.

The conclusion is not hard to draw if one has a suspicious mind...

[tompoes]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Solution seem to buy a zeiss lens from a reliable supplier and test the lens immediatly after the purchase. If there is a focus problem you can then return the lens.

Thanks for the input.

[jaapv]

Yes - or calculate an adjustment by Will van Manen into the price

[tompoes]

I suppose Wil Manen can also do the coding for a Leica M9 P.

Considering buying the Biogon 21 mm but the Diglloyd comments did hold me off, but the solution seem to be proceed with the purchase and have it corrected by a local supplier if so required.

An excellent forum for a newbee.

[jaapv]

He can and will code; not expensive and fast turnaround. Have it coded as an Elmarit old type. It is btw an excellent lens the image quality is superior.

[250swb]

I suppose Wil Manen can also do the coding for a Leica M9 P.

Considering buying the Biogon 21 mm but the Diglloyd comments did hold me off, but the solution seem to be proceed with the purchase and have it corrected by a local supplier if so required.

An excellent forum for a newbee.

 

You don't need to send a new Zeiss lens for coding, or at least the latest 21mm f2.8 Biogon has a groove machined in the mount (like the latest CV lenses), so you can add a coding mark yourself with just a dab of paint, and it brings up the correct 28mm frameline that you need to get the coding to work.

 

I don't read German Jaap, so I don't know what your link says. But I just wonder if this so called 'calibrating for film' isn't simply a misunderstanding that Zeiss are no longer going to supply the lens with a mount suitable for the M8's framelines, so all will hence forth only be suitable for film Leica's, and of course the M9?

 

P.S. my new 21mm f2.8 Biogon focuses perfectly on my M9.

 

 

Steve

[Viv]

Whether a lens focuses light on a film plane or on an electronic sensor makes no difference.

 

I have three Zeiss lenses. I use them on my M9 and on my Zeiss Ikon film rangefinder camera. They focus and render beautifully on both cameras.

 

P.S. My Leica 90 MM Summarit also focuses and renders beautifully on both cameras.

 

Some red herrings are extremely red indeed.

[andybarton]

It does because the tolerances for digital sensors are zero, while film is all over the place (in relative terms)

[jaapv]

You don't need to send a new Zeiss lens for coding, or at least the latest 21mm f2.8 Biogon has a groove machined in the mount (like the latest CV lenses), so you can add a coding mark yourself with just a dab of paint, and it brings up the correct 28mm frameline that you need to get the coding to work.

 

I don't read German Jaap, so I don't know what your link says. But I just wonder if this so called 'calibrating for film' isn't simply a misunderstanding that Zeiss are no longer going to supply the lens with a mount suitable for the M8's framelines, so all will hence forth only be suitable for film Leica's, and of course the M9?

 

P.S. my new 21mm f2.8 Biogon focuses perfectly on my M9.

 

 

Steve

 

 

Combined with a digital rangefinder camera with 1.3 crop factor, it becomes a 20 mm super wide angle with impressive perspective as well.

 

Which is a direct reference to the M8 Other lenses have similar endorsments.

[glenerrolrd]

Popflash has been a reliable supplier of zeiss zm glass since before the M8. Read their explanation before you disregard it as a RED Herring. They point out that while the adjustment is small ..its real and on a lens like the 50 1.5 the lens needs to be adjusted to match the Leica M standard . Zeiss will make the adjustment at the factory on request but don t know the cost. They changed my mounts for no charge to bring up the correct framelines.

 

I ve had three zeiss zm lenses adjusted by DAG at the same time I had new mounts (to bring up the correct framelines) and 6 bit coding . Have found all three lenses to be accurate after the calibration .

 

I have also found Diglloyd to produce some excellent insights into the Leica and zeiss glass.

[jaapv]

Sorry - the focal plane of film is exactly on the same place as a sensor. What differs is that the tolerance of the location of the focal plane is considerably less on a sensor than on film for a number of reasons. So a number of Zeiss lenses are out of digital tolerance, as they are a film body maker.

If this were not the case it would be impossible to focus lenses calibrated to the M8/9 on a film body. Which not, in fact they focus better.

 

 

I'm not blaming Popflash, which is indeed a highly reputable store. But even they can only write what Zeiss' marketing/juridical department is saying.I already supplied one translation in this thread, I'll "translate" this one as well

 

Basically it says: "Yes we know we would need to adjust our product more precisely for a sensor than for film. However, we are not about to do that, so if your lens misfocusses on a digital body we do not take responsiblity, as we adjust our lenses to the less precise level needed for film."

 

I cannot believe that Zeiss would kill off their RF lens line by deliberately misadjusting their lenses to work on film only. Most of their sales must be to Leica digital owners.

So from now on it is a bit of a lottery; if you get a lens that is spot-on you are OK, if you happen to get one on the outside of the tolerance range you will have to pay for adjusting, or depend on Zeiss' good will.

[Nick_S]

What I found surprising about the Popflash.com claims was that the Flange Focal Distance (FFD) for the digital bodies is 27.9mm versus 27.86mm for a film body and that the digital value is out of spec. for the M-mount.

 

Nick

[jaapv]

The values may well be true, but where do you measure film? On the surface, in the middle or on the carrier layer? That is more than 0.04 mm.... One would need Leica's rationale for choosing their value to see what this means.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[ho_co]

The Sonnar 50/1.5 is a special case, designated a "C" lens, meaning that it has noticeable focus shift, as did all high-speed 'classic' designs of the 1950's and 1960's.

 

There are numerous threads on the forum about having the lens adjusted for proper focus wide open (Leica's design choice) or for proper focus stopped down a couple stops (as was done more generally).

 

Zeiss has always offered to adjust that lens according to the user's wishes in that regard. This is a matter of user choice, not of film/digital focus.

[Keith (M)]

The Sonnar 50/1.5 is a special case, designated a "C" lens, meaning that it has noticeable focus shift, as did all high-speed 'classic' designs of the 1950's and 1960's.

 

Indeed. As it happens, just a couple of hours ago my new 50mm C Sonnar f1.5 arrived. A quick test at f1.5 on my M9 shows that yes, it does slightly front-focus. At f2.8 it is spot-on. However, I bought it purely for use on my M7 so it will be interesting to see how much (if any) this front-focus at f1.5 shows up. A bit too bright for f1.5 to go out and about at the moment for a comprehensive test across a range of apertures on the M7, will have to wait until evening.